Supervisors Seek Jail Impasse Report : Law enforcement: Sheriff and citizens review board are locked in conflict over inspection of county jails.

Asserting that civilian inspection of San Diego County’s jails is vital to public confidence in law enforcement, two county supervisors Monday asked a citizens review board to disclose any problems it may be having with the Sheriff’s Department.

The Times reported two weeks ago that Sheriff Jim Roache has refused to allow the Citizens Law Enforcement Review Board inspection of county jails, arguing that it is illegal.

The review board is authorized through a county ordinance to make annual inspections and report its findings to the Board of Supervisors, the presiding judge of the Superior Court, the sheriff, the Board of Corrections and the state attorney general.

Board of Supervisors Chairman George Bailey and Supervisor Leon Williams have requested a report from the citizens panel at today’s board meeting detailing its inspection efforts as well as any lack of “cooperation and coordination” with the Sheriff’s Department.

“We are very concerned,” they wrote, “over recent news accounts which indicate that the sheriff and the review board are at odds with respect to the review board having access to the county’s detention facilities for general orientation and inspection purposes.”

In an interview, Williams said Monday that he was “raising a question as to the problems associated with the review board. If there are problems, what can we do to correct them?”

The sheriff’s office has argued that the right to inspect the jails is granted through state law to an advisory committee of the County Board of Supervisors. Two of the members of that committee are appointed by the sheriff, two by the courts and two by county supervisors.

The review board was created by voters in November, 1990. Three months later, county supervisors decided to have the review board usurp the advisory committee’s powers, including the right to inspect the jails. Sheriff’s officials argued that, since it had no power to select review board members, the review panel could not conduct the inspections by law.

“This is a debate between the Sheriff’s Department and the Board of Supervisors, not a conflict between the review board and the sheriff,” said Rick Pinckard, legal counsel for the Sheriff’s Department. “The sheriff is not opposed to investigation of his department.”

The charter amendment voters approved in 1990 gave the review board the right to monitor wrongdoing in the Sheriff’s Department but not the right to inspect the jails, Pinckard said.

Pinckard believes that county staff and the Sheriff’s Department will resolve the dispute before long but could not comment on how an agreement might be reached.

Some sheriff’s officials have suggested that the review panel subcommittee inspecting the jails consist of two review board members, two chosen by the courts and two appointed by Roache, similar to the makeup of the advisory committee.

“I can’t see anything here that can’t be worked out,” Bailey said.

Eileen Luna, the review board’s executive director, said a committee member will make a presentation to the board today about the problems it has had in trying to inspect the jails.

“I would like the review board to fulfill its mandate,” she said. “If there are issues or concerns, they need to be worked out so the review board can act the way it should under the ordinance.”